For Juan Jose Romero
is borne, the more scientific studies are lower percentage of homosexuals are . The greater the freedom to respond as well.
long fans of homosexuality assumptions have wielded Alfred Kinsey studies that "proved" that there were 10% of homosexuals.
Since the mid-twentieth century, successive studies have been declining. In 2003 the British Labour government gave good figures for the homosexual group Stonewall already lowered to 7%, but even false served for various lobbies would hold public funds. With the exception of the English socialist government, no other Western government has taken such high figures.
In 2008 the General Social Survey lowered to 2.9%, although the big blow came with the macro-of the 2009-2010 ONS UK , 450,000 responses, the percentage stood at 1.03% gay.
The study was, of course, hit particularly hard. But time has shown that science was impeccable. The survey Norway, Norwegian Living Conditions Survey, 2010 data yet provide low, 0.7% of homosexuals, and disarmed the false argument of course fear response in a country so free.
body now very fond of the gay lobby, The Williams Institute , conducted a study to moderate the effect of the above, and analyzing the findings of five U.S. and five European studies reach the conclusion that the number of homosexuals in the U.S. stood at 1.7% , fill put 1.8% more, I guess the rest of the 20 "sexual preferences" remaining.
That a pro-gay study these figures must have left more than one thoughtful.
studio on the other hand is not without his grace, the director said that although no data, homosexuals have increased by 2% since the early of 90 and, without embarrassment, lest they lose morals.
Y cares what percentage? "Well, is important because 7 years ago the cover of The Journal and some ministers spoke in English 4 million gays and 10% of the population lived in grievous oppression with incalculable social effects to want to live together with roles equal to those of true marriage.
The argument of the million and 10% was used to impose an unjust law and roll without any consensus against the Senate, CGPJ , the judiciary bodies, etc, etc ... by a narrow majority in Congress (Not in the Senate, I insist, that both houses are supposed to represent the people).
The argument of the million and 10% was used to impose an unjust law and roll without any consensus against the Senate, CGPJ , the judiciary bodies, etc, etc ... by a narrow majority in Congress (Not in the Senate, I insist, that both houses are supposed to represent the people).
In short, if 1.7% of gays, and say, barely a third of them are interested in marriage (0.6% of the population), it is:
1 a) a peculiar
exotic minority and 2) in a living situation
exotic and unusual laws should be made to the ordinary, not exotic and peculiar. With some administrative regulations for the exotic and peculiar and quite: a PACS as in France, at best. Two gays together
should not have more rights than two sisters who live together or three friends living together.
1 a) a peculiar
exotic minority and 2) in a living situation
exotic and unusual laws should be made to the ordinary, not exotic and peculiar. With some administrative regulations for the exotic and peculiar and quite: a PACS as in France, at best. Two gays together
should not have more rights than two sisters who live together or three friends living together.
simple mode to submit articles 
0 comments:
Post a Comment